Warning

Info

Warning

Info

Warning

Info

LSDefine

Simple English definitions for legal terms

blind trust

Read a random definition: international commerce

A quick definition of blind trust:

A blind trust is a type of trust where the person who creates the trust (the trustor) and the person who will receive the assets (the beneficiary) do not know what is inside the trust. Instead, a trustee manages the trust until the assets are supposed to be given to the beneficiary or until the trustor decides to close the trust. People use blind trusts to avoid conflicts of interest or to hide assets from others. For example, politicians may use blind trusts to keep their assets private. However, some people criticize blind trusts because the trustor still knows what assets they put into the trust, which could create a conflict of interest.

A more thorough explanation:

A blind trust is a type of trust where the trustor (the person who creates the trust) and the beneficiary (the person who receives the assets from the trust) do not know what assets are inside the trust after it is created. Instead, a trustee manages the trust until the assets are supposed to be given to the beneficiaries or until the trustor decides to close the trust (if it is a revocable trust).

People often use blind trusts to avoid conflicts of interest or to hide assets from beneficiaries. For example, politicians, corporate officers, and other public figures may put their investments into a blind trust before taking on new ventures. This way, they can avoid any accusations of favoritism or bias towards certain companies or industries.

However, blind trusts are not foolproof. While the trustor and beneficiary may not know what assets are in the trust, they still know what assets they put into the trust. This means that they may still have a conflict of interest, even if they are not aware of the specific assets in the trust.

Another use of blind trusts for politicians is to avoid disclosing their assets when they are elected to office. Normally, politicians must disclose what assets they own, but they can avoid this by placing their assets into a blind trust. This prevents them from having to disclose the contents of the trust.

For example, if a politician owns stock in a company that may be affected by a new law they are proposing, they could put that stock into a blind trust. This way, they would not be accused of passing the law to benefit themselves financially.

blind tiger | blog

Warning

Info

General

General chat about the legal profession.
main_chatroom
👍 Chat vibe: 0 👎
Help us make LSD better!
Tell us what's important to you
So all the D1 athletes will get into a T-14. What else is new?
@TheAdoptedOne: that is called "Dean Poker Night" lol
@ClockworkBlue: I feel like most people could train for the 40 for the same amount of time as they do the LSAT and get close to sub 5 which would be equivalent to a 167+
this is like the schizophrenic posts JJK tik tok be putting out
powerscaling Law School deans up next
11:19
Election Day election day
Write in Dean Z vote
11:20
Saw a guy that wrote in Biden and he said no retirement for you buddy
1a2b3c4d26z
11:20
@ClockworkBlue: god I hope that's true
if the country was run the same as Mich Law it would be a better place
Imagine if election night was run by an adcom? Like, "yep, we could get the results Friday, or June 2025."
imagine if it was like Berkley applications
1a2b3c4d26z
11:22
Election status: Complete
1a2b3c4d26z
11:22
For months
triplethread
11:23
erection day
soapy
11:23
Shoutout to Robinhood's election bet not resolving until January
triplethread
11:23
is anyone else like certain that trump will win
ambitiouslizard
11:23
he aint winning
triplethread
11:23
i like being a pessimist
ambitiouslizard
11:24
he lost his re-election, why would he win this one?
1a2b3c4d26z
11:25
I have no idea why people have so much beef w berkeley's app
I've been reading a bit about "herding," which is this idea that pollsters are making the race look tied so they look right no matter who wins.
1a2b3c4d26z
11:26
Like... it's a more involved app but you don't have to do it? They're clearly trying to have some self-selection go on
I 100% agree with the self selection, I also am not even close to touching the medians there. However I think the huge PS plus the video and especially the very specific criteria for the why Berkeley essay is pretty crazy
I'm curious, how bold can one be in those videos? Is it worth making a satirical Jason Statham-action short if the adcoms have no sense of humor?
the more risk you take the higher chance of it backfiring
my instinct would be low humor bc if they have such a complex application I would feel hesitant to use a major part of it as a joke. They clearly take their admissions seriously and a joke video might convey the wrong thing at the wrong time. I think that humor is best put into a PS anecdote where it adds some shine to your personality
safe is always better
All good points
LSD+ is ad-free, with DMs, discounts, case briefs & more.